The War Thatâ€™s Not a War

â€œThe executive has no right, in any case, to decide the question, whether there is or is not cause for declaring war.â€- James Madison

A speech before the US House of Representatives on July 1, 2010

In January 1991, we went to war in the Middle East against Saddam Hussein, Iraq’s dictator who was our ally during the Iran-Iraq war. A border dispute between Kuwait and Iraq broke out after our State Department gave a green light for Hussein’s invasion.

After Iraq’s successful invasion of Kuwait we reacted with gusto and have been militarily involved in the entire region, six thousand miles from our shores, ever since. This has included Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia. After twenty years of killing and a couple trillion dollars wasted, not only does the fighting continue with no end in sight, but our leaders threaten to spread our bombs of benevolence on Iran.

For most Americans, we are at war — at war against a tactic called terrorism, not a country.

This allows our military to go any place in the world without limits as to time or place.

That is true, but our presidents have and Congress and the people have not objected. Congress obediently provides all the money requested for the “war.”

People are dying, bombs are dropped, our soldiers are shot at and killed.

Our soldiers wear uniforms; our enemies do not. They are not part of any government. They have no planes, no tanks, no ships, no missiles, and no modern technology.

What kind of a war is this anyway? If it really is one. If it was a real war we would have won it by now.

Our stated goal since 9/11 has been to destroy al Qaeda. Was al Qaeda in Iraq? Not under Saddam Hussein. Our leaders lied us into invading Iraq and deceived us into occupying Afghanistan.

There’s still really no al Qaeda in Iraq and only a hundred or so in Afghanistan, yet there is no end in sight to the “war.” Could there have been other reasons for this war that is not a war?

Military victory in Afghanistan is illusive. Does anyone really know whom we are fighting and why?

Why has the war not ended? Nine years and it continues to spread. Some claim it is to keep America safe, that our soldiers are fighting and dying for our freedom, defending our Constitution. Are we being lied to in order to keep us in this spreading war, just as we were lied to in the 1960’s to keep us in Vietnam?

We own the Iraq government as we do Afghanistan’s. In Afghanistan we are fighting the Taliban-those dangerous people with guns, defending their homeland.

Once they were called the Mujahideen, our old allies, along with Osama bin Laden, in the fight to oust the Soviets from Afghanistan in the 1980’s.

What gratitude? Those same people now resent our benevolent occupation-with a little violence thrown in.

The resistance to our presence grows as our perseverance wanes.

Our people are waking up but our officials refuse to recognize the longer we stay the greater is the support for those dedicated to the principle that Afghanistan is for Afghans, who resent all foreign occupation.

The harder we fight a war that is not a war, the weaker we get and the stronger becomes our enemy.

When an enemy without weapons can resist an army of great strength, the most powerful of all history, one should ask, who has the moral high ground?

Military failure in Afghanistan is to be our destiny. Changing generals without changing our policies or our policy makers perpetuates our agony and delays the inevitable.

This is not a war that our generals have been trained for. Nation building, police work, social engineering is never a job for foreign occupiers and never an appropriate job for soldiers trained to win wars.

A military victory is no longer even a stated goal of our military leaders or our politicians, as they know that type of victory is impossible.

The sad story is:

This war is against ourselves, our values, our Constitution, our financial well being and common sense, and at the rate we are going, it is going to end badly. What we need are honest leaders with character and a new foreign policy.

14 thoughts on “The War Thatâ€™s Not a War”

I have to disagree with Ron Paul a little. I don't think afthanastan is going badly but there is no GOAL or OBJECTIVE in being there. That is the real problem with the war on terror. There is not objective that we can say we won and are done.

Seven days after 9/11, Congress passed Senate Joint Resolution 23 [SJ Res. 23]. This resolution, entitled: “Authorization for Use of Military Force,” gave the President the authority to:

“[U]se all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.”

At the insistence of the Democrats, Congress passed a subsequent resolution prior to the invasion of Iraq. House Joint Resolution 114 [HJ Res. 114], entitled: “Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq,” was signed into law by President Bush on October 14, 2002. The key part of the resolution stated:

“The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to:

(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and

Not only were there no formal Declarations of War, but Congress gave the President the authority to determine who to make war against.

And then to add insult to injury, Congress claimed it had the power to grant the President the power to use the military forces of these United States to enforce UN Resolutions.

Instead of formally declaring war, Congress is simply passing Resolutions authorizing presidents to make war and vesting them with the discretion to determine what country to attack. A review of the debates in the Constitutional Convention of 1787 shows this is clearly contrary to the intent of the Founders.

On second thought, this power might for raising an army since it is 'calling forth the militia'. How exactly that is may depend on how the constitution defines 'militia'. That could be for a draft or that could be for using the state armies. I'm not sure but once they raise those armies they might be able to use it for those purposes.

October 11, 2010 at 1:01 pm

Slowrid-Der

A draft is unconstitutional. They can raise an army but they would have to convince the people to join because we are not the slaves of the government. It is one of the checks and balances we enjoy

Congress can not subvert the constitution by handing over the ability to declare war to the executive branch. Each individual conflict must be decided by the congress before the executive has the power to wage war. Another check and balance, even though our current parties subvert the constitution on a daily basis, making checks and balances useless.

sure but it won't affect the ones who secede. Oh forgive me most high imperial king for i have not learned english as my first language and even if my grammar is most incorrect … forget it lol you disparage my sentence to make a similar one.

I would settle if you learned English as your 2nd, 3rd, or even 4th language because then your comments would be easy to comprehend.

Writing your thoughts out is not the same as speaking them. They sound different. My only explanation is that you are using some kind of dragonspeak or spend to much time using some kind of chat software. This could make you a chronic texter. When I combine this fact with your general ignorance I conclude you are between the age of 12 and 17. Am I right?

well I suppose I should have illuminted that it would not affect the ones who secede as long as the us government didn't try to invade. Of course depending on how many states seceded the government might be hard pressed to do much of anything that wouldn't be suicidal. Is this comprehended by you? As for my age you are dead wrong. Are you a Neocon?

I would say that the war on terror is never meant to be won. It is an obvious power grab. They are not going to give any conditions that we could then say that it's time they rolled their power grabs back. In the control freaks ever eternal quest to make any government into a dictatorship.

OUT WITH THE UNITED NATIONS–OUT WITH THE FEDERAL RESERVE–TAKE OUR GOVERMENT BACK TO THE PEOPLE–THE TWO PARTY SYSTEM IS NOT WORKING–HUNDREDS OF LOBBIST PAY OFF THE GOVREMENT TO LOOK THE OTHER WAY–LAST BUT NOT LEASE-THE NEW WORLD ORDER–THE BIGGEST RICHEST CROOKS OF THEM ALL.THEY MOVE SLOW AND PAY THE BEST.–==THEY WILL BE THE DOWN FALL OF FREEDOM—HAVE EVERYBODY WITH MICRO CHIPS FOR I.D.s SO THEY CAN CONTROL US.–LIKE NO I.D. NO FOOD,GAS,BANKING ACCOUNT,INTERSTATE TRAVEL,NO PASSPORT,NO FREEDOM TO GO AND COME AS YOU PLEASE.THINK OF OUR CHILDREN.WE MUST STOP THESE EVEIL PEOPLE NOW